- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 09:25:25 -0500
- To: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
- Cc: Jeen Broekstra <jeen.broekstra@aduna.biz>, andy.seaborne@hp.com, RDF Data Access Working Group <public-rdf-dawg@w3.org>
On Jan 17, 2006, at 9:06 AM, Eric Prud'hommeaux wrote: > On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 02:57:18PM +0100, Jeen Broekstra wrote: >> >> Seaborne, Andy wrote: >> >>> Comment on old syntax tests. What happens about the approved ones? >>> >>> Some at least, are named "*oldsyntax" in HTML document but I guess >>> people also go straight to the directory structure. >>> >>> Is there anyway to get a listing of the tests that are current? I >>> sthat >>> part of CR work? >> >> Is there any reason to keep the old tests around as-is rather than >> just >> updating them to current syntax? > > I propose that the WG decide that test editors have licence to update > any approved test to follow syntax changes. That's more of a process change than I know how to handle. Let's please keep it where changing an approved test needs explicit WG OK. I wonder how we got out of sync? I try to keep the tests consistent with WG decisions. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Tuesday, 17 January 2006 14:25:33 UTC